Jump to content

Sharia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Fastfactchecker (talk | contribs) at 01:16, 21 August 2006 (→‎Freedom of speech: scientifcally based challenages). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Sharia (Template:ArB Template:ArTranslit)generally refers to a body of Islamic law, even though this meaning is considered very restrictive. Sharia, which etymologically means "way" or "path", is the legal framework within which the public aspects and some private aspects of life are ruled for those living within the state and who belongs to the islamic community (al-'Ummah al-'Islamiyah). Non-muslims in a sharia-abiding country follow the rules of their own community.

Sharia deals with many aspects of day-to-day life, including politics, economics, banking, business law, contract law, and social issues. Some accept Sharia as the body of precedent and legal theory before the 19th century, while other scholars view Sharia as a changing body, and include reform Islamic legal theory from the contemporary period. [citation needed]

Before the 19th century legal theory was considered the domain of the traditional legal schools of thought. Most Sunni Muslims follow Hanafi, Hanbali, Maliki or Shafii, while most Shia Muslims follow Jaafari (Hallaq 1997, Brown 1996, Aslan 2006).

Divergent developments after the 19th century

During the 19th century the history of Islamic law took a sharp turn due to new challenges the Muslim world faced: the West had risen to a global power and colonized a large part of the world, including Muslim territories. Societies change from the agricultural to the industrial stage. New social and political ideas emerged and social models slowly shifted from hierarchical towards egalitarian. The Ottoman Empire and the rest of the Muslim world were in decline, and calls for reform became louder. In Muslim countries, codified state law started replacing the role of scholarly legal opinion. Western countries sometimes inspired, sometimes pressured, and sometimes forced Muslim states to change their laws. Secularist movements pushed for laws deviating from the opinions of the Islamic legal scholars. Islamic legal scholarship remained the sole authority for guidance in matters of rituals, worship, and spirituality, while they lost authority to the state in other areas. The Muslim community became divided into groups reacting differently to the change. This division persists until the present day (Brown 1996, Hallaq 2001, Ramadan 2005, Aslan 2006, Safi 2003).

  • Secularists believe the law of the state should be based on secular principles, not on Islamic legal theory.
  • Traditionalists believe that the law of the state should be based on the traditional legal schools. However, traditional legal views are considered unacceptable by most modern Muslims, especially in areas like women's rights or slavery [1].
  • Reformers believe that new Islamic legal theories can produce modernized Islamic law [2] and lead to acceptable opinions in areas such as women's rights [3].
  • Salafis believe that the traditional schools were wrong, and therefore failed, and strive to follow the generation of early Muslims.

Etymology

The term Sharia itself derives from the verb shara'a, which according to Abdul Mannan Omar's Dictionary of the Holy Qur'an connects to the idea of "system of divine law; way of belief and practice" (45:18) in the Qur'an.

Legal scholar L. Ali Khan explains that "the concept of shariah has been thoroughly confused in legal and common literature. For some Muslims, shariah consists of the Quran and the prophet’s Sunna but nothing else. For others, it also includes classical fiqh. Most encyclopedias define shariah as law derived from the Qur'an, the Sunna, and classical fiqh derived from consensus (ijma) and analogy (qiyas).This definition of shariah inappropriately lumps together the revealed with the unrevealed. This blending of sources has created a muddled assumption that scholarly interpretations are as sacred and beyond revision as are the Quran and the Sunna. The Qur'an and the Sunna constitute the immutable Basic Code, which should be kept separate from ever-evolving interpretive law (fiqh). This analytical separation between the Basic Code and fiqh is necessary to" dissipate confusion around the term Sharia. See The Reopening of the Islamic Code:The Second Era of Ijtihad," 1 University of St. Thomas Law Journal 341 (2003).

General

Mainstream Islam distinguishes between fiqh, which means 'understanding of details' and refers to the inferences drawn by scholars, and sharia, which refers to the principles that lie behind the fiqh. Scholars hope that fiqh and sharia are in harmony in any given case, but they cannot be sure.[citation needed]

Sharia has certain laws which are regarded as divinely ordained, concrete and timeless for all relevant situations (for example, the ban against drinking liquor as an intoxicant). It also has certain laws which are extracted based on principles established by Islamic lawyers and judges (Mujtahidun).

For traditional Sunni Muslims, the primary sources of Islamic law are the Qur'an, the Hadith, the unanimity of Muhammad's disciples on a certain issue (ijma), and Qiyas (drawing analogy from the essence of divine principles). Qiyas — various forms of reasoning, including by analogy — are used by the law scholars (Mujtahidun) to deal with situations where the sources provided no concrete rules. The consensus of the community or people, public interest, and others were also accepted as secondary sources where the first four primary sources allow.[citation needed]

In Imami-Shi'i law, the sources of law (usul al-fiqh) are the Qur'an, anecdotes of the Prophet's practices and those of the 12 Imams, and the intellect (aql). The practices called Sharia today, however, also have roots in local customs (Al-urf).[citation needed]

Islamic jurisprudence is called fiqh and is divided into two parts: the study of the sources and methodology (usul al-fiqh - roots of the law) and the practical rules (furu' al-fiqh — branches of the law).[citation needed]

The comprehensive nature of Sharia law is due to the belief that the law must provide all that is necessary for a person's spiritual and physical well-being. All possible actions of a Muslim are divided (in principle) into five categories: obligatory, meritorious, permissible, reprehensible, and forbidden. Fundamental to the obligations of every Muslim are the Five Pillars of Islam.

Sections of Sharia law

Sharia law is divided into two main sections:

  1. The acts of worship, or al-ibadat, these include:
    1. Ritual Purification (Wudu)
    2. Prayers (Salah)
    3. Fasts (Sawm and Ramadan)
    4. Charities (Zakat)
    5. Pilgrimage to Mecca (Hajj)
  2. Human interaction, or al-mu'amalat, which includes:
    1. Financial transactions
    2. Endowments
    3. Laws of inheritance
    4. Marriage, divorce, and child care
    5. Foods and drinks (including ritual slaughtering and hunting)
    6. Penal punishments
    7. Warfare and peace
    8. Judicial matters (including witnesses and forms of evidence)

Contemporary practice of Sharia law

There is tremendous variance in the interpretation and implementation of Islamic law in Muslim societies today. Liberal movements within Islam have questioned the relevance and applicability of sharia from a variety of perspectives. Several of the countries with the largest Muslim populations, including Indonesia, Bangladesh and Pakistan, have largely secular constitutions and laws, with only a few Islamic provisions in family law. Turkey has a constitution that is strongly secular. India is the only country in the world which has separate muslim civil laws, framed by Muslim Personal Law board, and wholly based on Sharia. However, the criminal laws are uniform.

Some controversial laws are thought to favour Muslim men, including rejection of alimony and polygamy.

Most countries of the Middle East and North Africa maintain a dual system of secular courts and religious courts, in which the religious courts mainly regulate marriage and inheritance. Saudi Arabia and Iran maintain religious courts for all aspects of jurisprudence, and religious police assert social compliance. Laws derived from sharia are also applied in Sudan, Libya and Afghanistan. Some states in northern Nigeria have reintroduced Sharia courts. In practice the new Sharia courts in Nigeria have most often meant the re-introduction of relatively harsh punishments without respecting the much tougher rules of evidence and testimony. The punishments include amputation of one/both hands for theft, stoning for adultery, and execution for apostasy.

Many consider the punishments prescribed by Sharia as being barbaric and cruel; Islamic scholars argue that, if implemented properly, the punishments serve as a deterrent to crime. In international media, practices by countries applying Islamic law have fallen under considerable criticism at times. This is particularly the case when the sentence carried out is seen to greatly tilt away from established standards of international human rights. This is true for the application of the death penalty for the crime of adultery, and other such punishments such as amputations for the crime of theft and flogging for fornication or public intoxication. [4]

An unusual secular-state example was the rejected proposal[1] for a Sharia arbitration court to be established in Ontario, Canada. That province's 1991 arbitration court law allows disputes to be settled in alternative courts to avoid congestion and delay in the court system. The proposed sharia court would handle disputes between Muslim complainants. Critics claimed that misogyny which they held to be inherent in Sharia might influence the Canadian justice system, but proponents argued that those who do not wish to go by the court's rulings are not forced to attend it. Moreover, these sharia courts in Canada would be only orthodox in a limited way as they respect the priority of Canadian civil law. Anybody not satisfied with a ruling from the sharia court could appeal to a civil court. As such, this sharia court would be only a very pale version of Sharia.

On September 11, 2005, Ontario premier Dalton McGuinty stated in a telephone interview that religious arbitration would no longer be allowed. However, the proposed changes to the Ontario Arbitration Act[5] do not specifically mention religious arbitration, but reduce the power of private arbitration in the area of family law, and introduce other changes. Specifically, under the proposed changes family arbitrators will be regulated, participants in family law arbitration cases will not be able to give up their right to appeal an arbitrator's decision to a court, and a pre-nuptial agreement to resolve family law matters, should they arise, through an arbitrator rather than through a court will no longer be binding.

Nevertheless, the proposed changes were condemned by parts of the Muslim community.[citation needed]

Though Islamic law is interpreted differently across times, places and scholars, following fundamentalist's literal and traditional interpretations, however, it is legally binding on all people of the faith and even on all people who come under their control.[citation needed]

Laws and practices under Sharia

The penalty for theft

In accordance with the Qur'an and several hadith, theft is punished by imprisonment or amputation of hands or feet, depending on the number of times it was committed.[2][3]

Dietary laws

Sharia dictates that Muslims may only eat from meat that has been slaughtered in the name of God and meets stringent dietary requirements. Such meat is called halāl, or "lawful". Islamic law prohibits a Muslim from eating pork, and most juridical opinions also hold monkey, dog, cat, carnivores and several other types of animal as harām (prohibited). For the meat of an animal to be halāl it must be one of the declared halāl species, and the animal may not be killed by excessively cruel or painful means. The traditional means of slaughter is by slicing open the jugular veins at the neck, resulting in quick blood loss; a state of shock and unconsciousness is induced, and death soon follows through cardiac arrest.

According to the Qur'an, the animal does not have to be slaughtered by a Muslim, but may be slaughtered by a Jew or a Christian (People of the Book) as long as it meets their strict dietary laws (Al-Ma'ida 5: "The food of those who have received the Scripture is lawful for you.") Thus, most Muslims will accept kosher meat as halāl. (Qur'an 2:173, 6:121)

The role of women under Sharia

Islam does not prohibit women from working, but emphasizes the importance of housekeeping and caring for the families of both parents. In theory, Sunni Islamic law allows husbands to divorce their wives at will, by clearly saying talaq ("I divorce you") three times in public. Women do not have the same right to divorce. In Shi'a Islam, divorce is more involved than this and state proceedings vary. In 2003, for example, a Malaysian court ruled that, under Sharia law, a man may divorce his wife via text messaging as long as the message was clear and unequivocal. [6] Such a divorce, known as the "triple talaq" is not allowed in most Muslim states. The divorced wife always keeps her dowry from when she was married, and is given child support until the age of weaning, at which point the child may be returned to its father if it is deemed to be best.

In addition, women are generally not allowed to be clergy or religious scholars. Many interpretations of Islamic law hold that women may not have prominent jobs, and thus are forbidden from working in the government. This has been a mainstream view in many Muslim nations in the last century, despite the example of Muhammad's wife Aisha, who both took part in politics[source needed] and was a major authority on hadith.

A Muslim may not marry or remain married to an unbeliever of either sex (2:221, 60:10). A Muslim man may marry a woman of the People of the Book (5:5); traditionally, however, Islamic law forbids a Muslim woman from marrying a non-Muslim man unless he converts to Islam.

See also ma malakat aymanukum.

Dress codes

[original research?]

The Qur'an also places a dress code upon its followers. The rule for men has been ordained before the women."say to the believing men to lower their gaze and preserve their modesty, it will make for greater purity for them and Allah is well aware of all that they do." For women, it emphasizes modesty. Allah says in the Qur'an, "And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof(interpreted as the face and hands), and let them wear their head-coverings over their bosoms, and not display their ornaments (interpreted as the body shape and possibly the hair) except to their husbands or their fathers, or their sons,  . . ." (surat an-Nur verse 31). All those in whose presence a woman is not obliged to practice the dress code are known to be her mahrams. Men have a dress code which is more relaxed: the loins must be covered from knee to waist. The rationale given for these rules is that men and women are not to be viewed as sexual objects. It is a fail safe system. Men keep their guard up and women protect themselves. Should either one fail, the other prevents the society from falling into fitna.

Turkey, a predominantly Muslim country, has controversial laws against these dress codes in schools and work places. After the declaration of the Republic in 1923, as part of revolutions brought by Atatürk, a modern dress code was encouraged. It is against the law to wear a head scarf while attending public school in Turkey [4], as well as France, where the recently enacted rule caused huge public controversy [5].

Some view Islamic women as being oppressed by the men in their communities because of the required dress codes. However, in more moderate nations, where these dress codes are not obligatory, there are still many Muslim women who practice it. Some choose to wear such clothes of their own free will because they believe it is the will of Allah, others due to community and social pressures.

One of the garments some women wear is the hijāb (of which the headscarf is one component). The word hijab is derived from the Arabic word hajaba which means 'to hide from sight or view', 'to conceal'. Hijāb means to cover the head as well as the body.

Domestic punishments

According to most interpretations, authorization for the husband to physically discipline disobedient wives is given in the Qur'an. First, admonishment is verbal, and secondly a period of refraining from intimate relations. Finally, if the husband deems the situation appropriate, he may hit her:

"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more [strength] than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them [first], [Next], refuse to share their beds, [And last] beat them [lightly]; but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means [of annoyance]: For Allah is Most High, great [above you all]." [[[Qur'an]] 4:34 English translation: Yusuf Ali.

The medieval jurist ash-Shafi'i, founder of one of the main schools of fiqh, commented on this verse that "hitting is permitted, but not hitting is preferable."

The Arabic verse uses idribu¯hunna (from the root daraba ضرب), whose commonest meaning in Arabic has been rendered as "beat", "hit", "scourge", or "strike". Besides this verse, other meanings for daraba used in the Qur'an (though not with a human direct object) include 'to travel', 'to make a simile', 'to cover', 'to separate', and 'to go abroad', among others. For this reason — particularly in recent years (e.g. Ahmed Ali, Edip Yuksel) — some consider "hit" to be a misinterpretation, and believe it should be translated as "admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and separate from them." Certain modern translations of the Qur'an in the English language accept the commoner translation of "beat" but tone down the wording with bracketed additions. Whatever idribu¯hunna is meant to convey in the Qur'an -- and multiple, complementary meanings are quite common in Islam's holy book -- the verb is directed, not at a single husband, but to the community as a whole.

Several Hadith urge strongly against beating one's wife, such as: "How does anyone of you beat his wife as he beats the stallion camel and then embrace (sleep with) her? (Al-Bukhari, English Translation, vol. 8, Hadith 68, pp. 42-43), "I went to the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) and asked him: What do you say (command) about our wives? He replied: Give them food what you have for yourself, and clothe them by which you clothe yourself, and do not beat them, and do not revile them. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2139)". Others hadiths do indicate that husbands have a right to discipline their wives to a certain extent:

Fear Allah concerning women! Verily you have taken them on the security of Allah, and intercourse with them has been made lawful unto you by words of Allah. You too have right over them, and that they should not allow anyone to sit on your bed whom you do not like. But if they do that, you can chastise them but not severely. Their rights upon you are that you should provide them with food and clothing in a fitting manner. (Narrated in Sahih Muslim, on the authority of Jabir.) [7]

According to Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, head of the European Council for Fatwa and Research:

"If the husband senses that feelings of disobedience and rebelliousness are rising against him in his wife, he should try his best to rectify her attitude by kind words, gentle persuasion and reasoning with her. If this is not helpful, he should sleep apart from her, trying to awaken her agreeable feminine nature so that serenity may be restored, and she may respond to him in a harmonious fashion. If this approach fails, it is permissible for him to beat her lightly with his hands, avoiding her face and other sensitive parts. In no case should he resort to using a stick or any other instrument that might cause pain and injury. Rather, this 'beating' should be of the kind the Prophet (peace be on him) once mentioned to a disobedient maid-servant, when he said 'If it were not for the fear of retaliation on the Day of Resurrection, I would have beaten you with this miswak (tooth-cleaning twig)' [as reported by Ibn Majah, by Ibn Hibban in his Sahih, and by Ibn Sa`d in his Tabaqat].[8] [9]

However, punishments are authorized by other passages in the Quran and Hadiths for certain crimes (e.g., extra-marital sex, adultery), and are employed by some as rational for extra-legal punative action while others disagree (quotations provided by Syed Kamran Mirza):

Quran-24:2 "The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication—flog each of them with hundred stripes: Let no compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by God, if ye believe in God and the last day."
Quran-17:32 "Nor come nigh to adultery: for it is a shameful (deed) and an evil, opening the road (to other evils)."
Sahi Muslim No. 4206: "A woman came to the prophet and asked for purification by seeking punishment. He told her to go away and seek God's forgiveness. She persisted four times and admitted she was pregnant. He told her to wait until she had given birth. Then he said that the Muslim community should wait until she had weaned her child. When the day arrived for the child to take solid food, Muhammad handed the child over to the community. And when he had given command over her and she was put in a hole up to her breast, he ordered the people to stone her. Khalid b. al-Walid came forward with a stone which he threw at her head, and when the blood spurted on her face he cursed her."
Sahih Al-Bukhari Vol 2. pg 1009; and Sahih Muslim Vol 2. pg 65: Hadhrat Abdullah ibne Abbaas (Radiallahu Anhu) narrates the lecture that Hadhrat Umar (Radiallaahu Anhu) delivered whilst sitting on the pulpit of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam). Hadhrat Umar (Radiallahu Anhu) said, "Verily, Allah sent Muhammad (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) with the truth, and revealed the Quran upon him. The verse regarding the stoning of the adulterer/ess was from amongst the verse revealed (in the Quraan). We read it, secured it and understood it. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) stoned and we stoned after him. I fear that with the passage of time a person might say, ‘We do not find mention of stoning in the Book of Allah and thereby go astray by leaving out an obligation revealed by Allah. Verily, the stoning of an adulterer/ress is found in the Quraan and is the truth, if the witnesses are met or there is a pregnancy or confession."

For a more detailed examination of the Islamic view of adultery, see Zina.

For a more detailed examination of "honor killing", see the Wikipedia entry.

Circumcision

Male circumcision involves the removal of the foreskin and is customary in most Muslim communities. It is performed at different ages in different cultures.

Female circumcision is not part of mainstream Islam. It is not practiced in Maghreb countries and most of Asia, but is performed by Muslims and non-Muslims alike across East Africa and the Nile Valley, as well as parts of the Arabian peninsula and Southeast Asia. In both areas, the custom predates Islam. Many African Muslims believe that female circumcision is required by Islam, but a large number of Muslims believe this practice has no basis in Islam. Nevertheless it is justified on religious grounds by Muslims who practice it, mostly in parts of Africa. [citation needed]

The Egyptian-born president of the 'European Council on Fatwa and Research', Yusuf al-Qaradawi, emphasises that this is not a religious obligation, but expresses his personal preference for removal of the prepuce of the clitoris, called clitoridotomy (Fatwa on islamonline.net.) The use of the term 'circumcision' is highly confusing, as the practice ranges from a mild superficial act that does not reduce any physiological function (the 'real' circumcision) to various forms of partial or even complete removal of female genital organs. In certain countries, this is accompanied by reducing the genital opening. These forms are, because of their brutal nature, also referred to as female genital mutilation (FGM). This term is most often used in official publications of the United Nations and World Health Organization.

Muslim apostates

In most interpretations of Shariah, conversion by Muslims to other religions is forbidden and is termed apostasy. Muslim theology equates apostasy to treason, and in most interpretations of shariah, the penalty for apostasy is death.

Illegal sexual relations: adultery, fornication and homosexuality

In most interpretations of Sharia, the death penalty is applied for homosexual acts. According to the opinions of scholars, acceptable means of performing the execution included burning, throwing from tall buildings, and stoning. [10]

Death by stoning is also the penalty for adultery, while lashing with 100 stripes is usually the legal penalty applied for fornication when the guilty parties are not married.

Freedom of speech

Sharia does not allow freedom of speech on such matters as scientifically based challenges to information in the Qur'an (e.g. that the age of the Earth is greater than 5,000 years) or any criticism of the prophet Muhammad.

The Qur'an says that Allah curses the one who harms the Prophet in this world and He connected harm of Himself to harm of the Prophet. There is no dispute that anyone who curses Allah is killed and that his curse demands that he be categorized as an unbeliever. The Judgment of the unbeliever is that he is killed. [...] There is a difference between ... harming Allah and His Messenger and harming the believers. Injuring the believers, short of murder, incurs beating and exemplary punishment. The judgement against those who harm Allah and His Prophet is more severe -- the death penalty.[6]

In Egypt, public authorities annulled, without his consent, the marriage of Prof. Nasr Abu Zayd when he got in conflict with an orthodox Islamic cleric from the Al-Azhar University in Cairo. The cleric had condemned Abu Zayd's reading of the Qur'an as being against the orthodox interpretation and labelled him an apostate (seen as a non-believer and consequently not permitted to marry or stay married to a Muslim woman). Abu Zayd fled to the Netherlands, where he is now a professor at the university of Leiden.

see also Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy

Sharia, democracy and human rights

In 1998 the Turkish Constitutional Court banned and dissolved Turkey's Refah Party on the grounds that the "rules of sharia", which Refah sought to introduce, "were incompatible with the democratic regime," pointing up that "Democracy is the antithesis of sharia." On appeal by Refah the European Court of Human Rights determined that "sharia is incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy"[7][8] Refah's sharia based notion of a "plurality of legal systems, grounded on religion" was ruled to contravene the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. It was determined that it would "do away with the State's role as the guarantor of individual rights and freedoms" and "infringe the principle of non-discrimination between individuals as regards their enjoyment of public freedoms, which is one of the fundamental principles of democracy". It was further ruled that

[T]he Court considers that sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable. Principles such as pluralism in the political sphere or the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it. […] It is difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia, which clearly diverges from Convention values, particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervenes in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts.[9]

On the other side, legal scholar L. Ali Khan determines "that constitutional orders founded on the principles of Sharia are fully compatible with democracy, provided that religious minorities are protected and the incumbent Islamic leadership remains committed to the right to recall".[10] However, Christian Pippan argues, that this contradicts the political reality in most Islamic states. "While constitutional arrangements to ensure that political authority is exercised within the boundaries of Sharia vary greatly among those nations",[11] most existing models of political Islam have so far grossly failed to accept any meaningful political competition of the kind that Khan himself has identified as essential for even a limited conception of democracy. Khan, writes Pippan, dismisses verdicts as from the European Court of Human Rights or the Turkish Constitutional Court "as an expression of purely national or regional preferences."[12]

Several major, predominantly Muslim countries criticized the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) for its perceived failure to take into account the cultural and religious context of non-Western countries. Iran claimed that the UDHR was a "a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition", which could not be implemented by Muslims without trespassing the Islamic law. Therefore the Organization of the Islamic Conference adopted the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam, which diverges from the UDHR substantially, affirming Sharia as the sole source of human rights. This Declaration became severely criticized by the International Commission of Jurists for allegedly gravely threatening the inter-cultural consensus, introducing intolerable discrimination against both non-Muslims and women, the restrictive character in regard to fundamental rights and freedoms and attacking the integrity, and dignity of the human being.

see also Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam

See also

References

  • Daniel W. Brown (1996). Rethinking traditions in modern Islamic thought. Cambridge University Press, UK. ISBN 0521653940
  • Wael B. Hallaq (2001). Authority, Continuity and Change in Islamic Law. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521803314
  • Wael B. Hallaq (1997). History of Islamic Legal Theories: An Introduction to Sunni Usul Al-Fiqh. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521590272
  • Tariq Ramadan (2005). Western Muslims and the Future of Islam. Oxford University Press, USA. ISBN 0195183568
  • Reza Aslan (2006). No God but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam. Random House Publishing Group. ISBN 0812971892
  • Cemal Kafadar (1996). Between Two Worlds: The Construction of the Ottoman State. University of California Press. ISBN 0520206002
  • Omid Safi (2003). Progressive Muslims: On Justice, Gender, and Pluralism. Oneworld Publications. ISBN 185168316X
  • Mumisa, Michael (2002) Islamic Law: Theory & Interpretation. Amana Publications. ISBN 1590080106

News articles

A bill proposed by lawmakers in the Indonesian province of Aceh would impose Shariah law on all non-Muslims, the armed forces and law enforcement officers, a local police official has announced. The news comes two months after the Deutsche Presse-Agentur warned of "Taliban-style Islamic police terrorizing Indonesia's Aceh". [13][14][15]

Notes

  1. ^ Dispute Resolution in Family Law: Protecting Choice, Promoting Inclusion : Marian Boyd
  2. ^ Islamic Law: Myths and Realities, by Denis J. Wiechman, Jerry D. Kendall, and Mohammad K. Azarian, muslim-canada.org
  3. ^ Qu'ran, Surah Al-Maeda, 5:38, Yusuf Ali
  4. ^ "The Problems of Turkey Rest on Women's Heads". Washington Post. October 29, 2000. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |First= ignored (|first= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |Last= ignored (|last= suggested) (help)
  5. ^ "Effort to ban head scarves in France sets off culture clash". USA Today. February 3, 2003. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |First= ignored (|first= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |Last= ignored (|last= suggested) (help)
  6. ^ The proof of the necessity of killing anyone who curses the Prophet or finds fault with him, masud.co.uk
  7. ^ Judgement in the case of Refah Partisi and Others v. Turkey, Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights, February 13 2003
  8. ^ Hearing of the European Court of Human Rights, January 22 2004 (PDF)
  9. ^ Refah Revisited: Strasbourg's Construction of Islam, by Christian Moe, Norwegian Institute of Human Rights, published at the site of The Strasbourg Conference
  10. ^ L. Ali Khan, A Theory of Universal Democracy: Beyond the End of History, The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 2003, ISBN 9041120033
  11. ^ Nathan Brown, Islamic Constitutionalism in Theory and Practice in Cotran, Eugene and Adel Omar Sherif (eds.), Democracy, the Rule of Law and Islam, London, Kluwer Law International, 1999
  12. ^ Bookreview of Khan's "A Theory of Universal Democracy: Beyond the End of History" by Christian Pippan for "The European Journal of International Law"
  13. ^ Draft law on Indonesia's Aceh province to impose Islamic law on all residents, The Associated Press / The Sacramento Bee, May 24, 2006
  14. ^ Indonesia's dilemma by Vaudine England, The Standard - China's Business Newspaper, May 6, 2006
  15. ^ Taliban-style Islamic police terrorizing Aceh, Deutsche Presse Agentur / ASAP Aceh News, March 10, 2006

External links

Muslim websites

Sunni websites

Reformist websites